Buy a digital back for my Contax 645?

[kipdent]

I have been wanting to buy a digital back for my beloved Contax 645 for many years, but as a serious hobbyist, not a professional, the cost has kept me from taking the plunge. However, prices for used backs such as the Phase One P45+ do seem to be coming down to the mere mortal range. I have not been following the technology on newer MFDB, so I'm wondering is readers here could share their opinions and advice on whether in 2016, keeping the Contax 645 (with my 35mm, 80mm, 120mm Macro and 210mm lenses) and investing in a back like the P45+ is advisable, or if technology has passed all this by and investing in a newer camera like the Mamiya or P1 is a better idea--especially because of their leaf-shutter lenses? Is the Contax a less-appropriate camera now with its focal plane shutter for the use of digital backs when compared to these newer cameras and lenses? And is the P45+ simply too old, both because of its lower resolution and technology, compared to the newer IQ backs? I've always been astonished with the image quality of my Contax 645 and its lenses with film, so I'm guessing a digital back would be as impressive, but maybe it's time to put it out to pasture? Please chime in!

[EinstStein]

I have Leica M9 and Contax 645 + Hasselblad CF39 digital back. Now my wife just got her A7RII which is packed mainly with Contax N 17-35mm, 24-85mm, and it is capable of using Contax 645 lenses, the adapter is fully auto capable, including aperture and AF.

-- When I want the best image quality (a subjective matter, be aware), It is Contax 645. (frequent used lens: 35mm, 120mm, occasionally 45-90mm).
-- When I want to shoot under really dark, it is A7RII. (Contax N 17-35mm).
-- When I want the best compromise of convenience and image quality, it is M9. (ZM 25mm, M 35mm, M 50mm, M 90mm).

My wife ask me to keep only one system, which is a hard choice, but if I have to, I would keep M9, second Contax b645.

So, does it worth to get a MFDB now? absolutely. By the way, I don't see any need to get high pixel count, I found the 18MP of M9 more than enough, and for C645, P25 or P25+ is more than enough to me too. and I am talking about landscape.

[Chris Livsey]

So, does it worth to get a MFDB now? absolutely.

An excellent subjective summary.
Just two other things to bear in mind:
Cogent arguments for having more pixels, even if you "throw them away" to go smaller have been made on the forum.
Cost  My fairly recent P45+ (H fitting) was the same cost ( I have a H body and lens already as you do for Contax) cost me the same as a new A7rII body. Of course older backs are even cheaper these days but chasing the cutting edge is expensive, especially for us amateurs, I still run a plain P20 in the V system and given the constraints of that mechanical system it only disappoints sometimes and that is because I push it outside its comfort envelope (hand held, at low speeds, without mirror lock, the V doesn't distribute all its energy as sound).

Summary: The give away is "beloved" why step outside that zone?

One caveat though, the Contax mount backs are less common so you will pay more.

[Christoph B.]

One caveat though, the Contax mount backs are less common so you will pay more.

And if you plan to use it on a tech cam you may have a hard time finding adapters...

I too want for a P+ MFDB a few month ago - sure the technology is a bit dated but that doesn't diminish the quality of the results. The only thing I had to discover was the fact that digital medium 'forces' you to be very precise in every aspect because of its potential. Once you realise how accurate the colour rendition is you pay more attention to the white balance. Once you realise how detailed the pictures can be you pay more attention to camera shake, vibrations, motion blur etc.

[Chris Livsey]

Once you realise how detailed the pictures can be you pay more attention to camera shake, vibrations, motion blur etc.

I often ponder how many "casual" shooters get anything like the full potential out of the A7RII for example.
The other plus point I forgot was that by sticking with your Contax you do retain a film option by only carrying a film back in addition not another system.
BTW your point, OP, about the P45+ being "simply too old, both because of its lower resolution and technology," is precisely what the dealers, bless them all, would wish you to believe.

[Theodoros]

I'm also using C645 (professionally) for the later 11 years (before that it was Bronica ETRSi) and have all the lenses but the 350 for it, the 9 later years, I use it with MFDBs on it and have had 4 of them (started with Sinar E-motion, then Imacon 528c and now have Sinarback 54H & Hasselblad CF-39MS), but have also tried P-25+ & P-45+ on it, as well as Sinarback 75H & Sinarback 22m.... I've also have used Sinarback 75LV on HY6, P-45+ & P-25+ on Hasselblad H, P65+ on Mamiya 645 AFDIII & Aptus II 12 on DF... For leaf shutter and movements, I've added a Fuji GX-680 (five lenses) with Contax 645 MFDB adapter on it so that one can just unplug the MFDB from the Contax and plug it on the Fuji...

Out of all the backs I've used, the ones that impressed me most for single shot IQ were the Sinarback 75H and Sinarback Emotion 75LV as they where the most accurate (meaning natural) for color fidelity and the Kodak sensor 22mp backs that (although not as neutral on their color with respect to the Dalsa 33mp sensor) have a unique "look" on their presentation (different curve with more contrast on the mids) that many still find "magic" (the fat pixel magic) as it highly reminds of "filmish looks".

Speaking of color accuracy, Hasselblad have recently presented a (very simple to apply) new calibration method that should match the color accuracy of the Sinarbacks, but I have to mention that the P1 backs I've tried (P-25+, P-45+ & P-65+) had all a "strange opinion" about color presentation which was anything but accurate (clearly cooler in temperature with over saturated the colors that are related to cyan)...

My final suggestion to you, would be to go for a Kodak sensor 22mp back with interchangeable adapting plate or, (second) to look for a Dalsa sensor 33mp back again with interchangeable adapter plate.... I believe the last thing you'll ever miss with an MFDB is resolution and as others said above, those backs (along with the Kodak sensor 39mp backs) are the best to use with a view camera if you ever decide to add one in the future.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Regarding "casual shooters", I would assume that folks consider their needs before investing 3000$+ into an A7rII + lenses.

But, the A7rII has a few provision making it easy to extract full benefits, name a vibration free shutter, no mirror vibration, image stabilisation and a pretty decent AF system. Good high ISO capability also helps. So, I think it is a pretty good system for folks who use a tripod but are less than religious about the mirror lock up.

Now regarding the P45+, I have one and it can make excellent images. Also, prices are going down, so it is an excellent time to buy into an MFD system. The P45+ is 1.1X crop, so it is quite a bit larger than the CMOS MFD sensors we have today. The reason size may be important that the crop factors can limit the availability of wide angle lenses.

Next model up from Phase One is the P65+ and I think it is full frame (645) but also uses a DALSA sensor which may offer better colour rendition.

I am pretty sure the Contax makes a very nice system with a Phase One back.

Central shutter is mostly of advantage if you shoot flash. It may also help reducing shutter related vibrations, but I don't know if that is a problem on the Contax 645.

Best regards
Erik

I often ponder how many "casual" shooters get anything like the full potential out of the A7RII for example.
The other plus point I forgot was that by sticking with your Contax you do retain a film option by only carrying a film back in addition not another system.
BTW your point, OP, about the P45+ being "simply too old, both because of its lower resolution and technology," is precisely what the dealers, bless them all, would wish you to believe.

[Theodoros]

.....about the P45+ being "simply too old, both because of its lower resolution and technology," is precisely what the dealers, bless them all, would wish you to believe....

 Well said... I agree this is the most important factor that a new comer to MFDB must bear in mind... MFDBs have evolved very little (if any at all) for image quality through the years in all aspects but resolution and even on resolution, one may find that he can print significantly bigger with low res MFDBs than a respective pixel count FF sensor... Modern MFDBs have evolved in other than image quality that are related to functionality, but as long as one doesn't need or can overcome the functionality advancement, he may as well save the money and use a 10 years old MFDB which will allow him to enter the "magic" of the MF world.... I very much doubt if the O/P adds an old MFDB to his Contax if the M9 will still be his favorite system....

[kipdent]

My fairly recent P45+ (H fitting) was the same cost ( I have a H body and lens already as you do for Contax) cost me the same as a new A7rII body. One caveat though, the Contax mount backs are less common so you will pay more.

My final suggestion to you, would be to go for a Kodak sensor 22mp back with interchangeable adapting plate or, (second) to look for a Dalsa sensor 33mp back again with interchangeable adapter plate...

Next model up from Phase One is the P65+ and I think it is full frame (645) but also uses a DALSA sensor which may offer better colour rendition.

I very much doubt if the O/P adds an old MFDB to his Contax if the M9 will still be his favorite system...

Thank you all for these helpful comments so far! I greatly appreciate it. I would like to comment on the few I have quoted above:

- It's breathtaking to me one could find a P45+ for the cost of a Sony A7rII... The rarity of the Contax mount must be the reason, and quite depressing. So the next comment about finding another brand back, that can use adapter plates, sounds appealing. Would such a back be less expensive, as well? And as Theodoros stated, are these competitor's backs even more color accurate? All this makes me wonder what the Phase One advantages may be, if any, other than more successful marketing. 

- The discussion around perceived need of "higher" resolution is extremely interesting to me. I love the look of film, and it also sounds ike the older backs are more "filmic" compared to the latest CMOS technology. Is the P65+, then, even a "sweeter" spot, with both CCD technology, but also a bit more resolution? Or is this unnecessary with the P45+ back hitting all the right IQ buttons? (I own an Epson 4900, so I can't currently print larger than 17 inches wide, but that may change.) Of course, a P65+ back in Contax mount is probably rarer than hen's teeth anyway.

- As the original poster, I was not the one who stated the M9 was my favorite system, though coincidentally, I do own an M9 and absolutely love it. But the Contax has always pulled at my heartstrings, and images with the 35mm Distagon make me weep. 

Thanks again for all these responses, and I hope to read more before pulling the trigger on an MFDB.

[Theodoros]

Thank you all for these helpful comments so far! I greatly appreciate it. I would like to comment on the few I have quoted above:

- It's breathtaking to me one could find a P45+ for the cost of a Sony A7rII... The rarity of the Contax mount must be the reason, and quite depressing. So the next comment about finding another brand back, that can use adapter plates, sounds appealing. Would such a back be less expensive, as well? And as Theodoros stated, are these competitor's backs even more color accurate? All this makes me wonder what the Phase One advantages may be, if any, other than more successful marketing. 

As I said before, I use a CF-39MS & I have good experience with P45+... The two backs share the same sensor and one will find share the same detail, DR and ISO performance.... Many will argue that P45+ is about a stop better, but if one tests for the same exposure, he may find that it's the sensitivity numbering on the two backs that is different... not noise as such. That said, one better underexpose the CF-39 by 2/3rds of a stop with respect to P45+ as to match the exposure, the P-45+ is considered (and probably is) the "king of long exposure" which is a thing that may be important to some, or not to some others... For color neutrality, it's probably not CF-39 that is better than P45+, but rather P1's idea of "color processing" which (as they claim) aims to "pleasing color"... Other than color accuracy being far more accurate with the other makers (and with a more accurate calibration method), I find that it is a false logic for a maker to decide what "pleasing color" is... I would rather prefer it if P1 would offer neutral color as the rest do and process that for my pleasing color if I so desire to do... (which I believe is the only logic that makes sense).

Other than that, it's not only P1's good marketing that resulted to P1's success in the market, it is mainly Hasselblad's continuous mistakes that helped since they closed the H-system, stopped making the CF backs and left P1 to make backs for everyone else that wanted to buy a back only for his camera (and keep his body). Strangely, they didn't even make stand alone backs for the H system either... only CF-V ones for the V system!

- The discussion around perceived need of "higher" resolution is extremely interesting to me. I love the look of film, and it also sounds ike the older backs are more "filmic" compared to the latest CMOS technology. Is the P65+, then, even a "sweeter" spot, with both CCD technology, but also a bit more resolution? Or is this unnecessary with the P45+ back hitting all the right IQ buttons? (I own an Epson 4900, so I can't currently print larger than 17 inches wide, but that may change.) Of course, a P65+ back in Contax mount is probably rarer than hen's teeth anyway.

- As the original poster, I was not the one who stated the M9 was my favorite system, though coincidentally, I do own an M9 and absolutely love it. But the Contax has always pulled at my heartstrings, and images with the 35mm Distagon make me weep. 

Thanks again for all these responses, and I hope to read more before pulling the trigger on an MFDB.

Resolution won't be a problem with MFDbs... you can safely print larger than 40 inch at the smaller size with any 22mp MFDB (let alone 33-39mp ones...) As for higher Iso, you'll find that MFDBs should be exposed for the HLs (and then some of them different to each other) leading to better ISO performance than the usual 200 ISO suggests... Usually MFDBs would easily cope with a lighting situation that one would use 400 ISO with a DSLR even if rated by the user to 160 ISO... Above that, one should use a DSLR anyway since the IQ would be inferior to both an MFDB or a DSLR used at lower ISO...

[Chris Livsey]

On price:

http://www.teamworkphoto.com/used-phase-contax-fitting-digital-back-p-20137.html

P30+ Contax fit £3118 (including VAT UK sales Tax)

https://www.calphoto.co.uk/product/Sony-Alpha-A7R-II-Compact-Mirrorless-Digital-Camera-Body/993-790A

A7rII body only Calumet (still viable in the UK) £2599 (VAT included)

[william]

To the OP:

Background: I'm a long-time Contax 645 user, both film and digital.  Did a review here of the Phase One P30 on Contax combo many years ago: https://luminous-landscape.com/phase-one-p30/ (since this is now a subscription site, you may or may not be able to view it, unfortunately).

Two questions:

(1) What kind of work do you shoot?

(2) In essence, why do you want to have the ability to shoot digitally with the Contax: in order to use the lenses *and* body digitally, or to be able to use the lenses digitally and still get that sweet Contax look?

I ask because the answer to these questions would shape my advice.  Thus, if the answer to #1 was "nothing routinely requiring extreme wide angle" and the answer to #2 was "to be able to use my Contax lenses with a digital system because I love the way they look," then I would suggest you look seriously at the Leica S (006 or 007, depending on your needs) plus a Contax adapter, rather than a digital back for the Contax 645.  And you can still keep your Contax and use it for film. That's where I am currently.   

Here's why I'm making this suggestion:

(1) You can get a 37 megapixel Leica S 006 there days for about $5500: http://leicastoremiami.com/collections/used-s-cameras/products/used-leica-s-typ-006-extra-battery-3

(2) The Contax adapter costs roughly $1700 new, $1300 preowned, $900 used.  (There was a preowned one here recently: http://leicastoremiami.com/products/certified-pre-owned-leica-s-adapter-c-for-contax-lenses-1.  I bought mine used from Leica Store Soho for $800)

(3) Even using the higher-end figures above for a used 006 (say $6000) and a new Contax adapter (say $1800), you're at $7800 for a digital platform on which you can use your existing Contax lenses (and, of course, the Leica lenses if you decide to get some in future).

(4) I don't know the precise going rate on used or new P45s and P65s in Contax mount, but I believe they're quite a bit higher than $7800:

 http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw=phase+one+p65&_sop=16&_osacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2045573.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.Xphase+one+p45.TRS0&_nkw=phase+one+p45&_sacat=0. 

EDIT: Actually, looks like one could get a used/refurbished P45+ for about the same price as a used Leica S plus Contax adapter: https://www.digitalback.com/product-category/0-pre-owned-digital-backs/4-contax-mount/

The P45 is 39 megs while the Leica is 37.5 megs, so that's a wash.  Now granted, the P65 is 60 megs versus the Leica's 37.5 megs, so that may be a deal breaker depending on what you shoot (and how big you print). 

The other thing that may be a deal-breaker is whether you need extreme wide-angle capability from your Contax lenses.  If so, then you need one of the near-full frame digital backs in order to preserve the existing angle of view of your 35mm when used with 645 film.  If I recall correctly, the Contax 645 35mm lens has an angle of view approximately the same as a 21mm lens would have on a 35mm camera.  That same lens on a Leica S via Contax adapter would "only" have the angle of view of a moderately wide wide-angle of roughly 28mm lens in 35mm terms, due to the sensor's crop factor as compared to full frame 645.  (Math: The Contax 35mm lens is exactly half the length of the native Leica S 70mm lens. The 70mm lens is roughly a "normal" angle of view, comparable to 56mm on a 35mm camera. Half of 56mm in 35mm terms = 28mm in 35mm terms). 

Even if you never wanted to buy a Leica lens, and provided that you could live with your widest Contax lens being the equivalent of a moderate wide angle, then I'd strongly suggest you consider this route.  Or, you could just eventually buy the Leica 30-90 zoom, the Leica 30mm, or the Leica 24mm.

Note: Having shot the Contax with Phase backs previously, I might not have been been entirely convinced in the abstract that I could replicate that same quality with the Contax lenses on the Leica S body.  Having now shot the Leica S with Contax (and Leica) lenses for some time, any doubts I may have had have disappeared.  The file depth and "feel" is equally as good (and in some ways better).  Admittedly, I have never shot with the newer CMOS Phase backs nor the extremely high resolution (80 megapixel) CCD Phase backs.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Having both P45+ and Sony A7rII I would be very hard pressed to find any advantage with the P45+, at least on the rational side. But, a camera doesn't make any pictures. To me it seems that the OP has a Contax 645 system and wants to take it into the digital age. The P45+ back seems to be a good tool for that.

A couple of points:

A camera needs a lens kit. Sony's lenses are a bit overpriced and I am not so sure quality is that good. Personally I feel I go with Canon lenses, the 16-35/4 zoom I just bought is incredibly good. But for Contax 645 owner with a good lens kit a P45+ back is a very good entry into digital.

Just to keep in mind, repairs on MFD can be messy and expensive. On the other hand the Phase One backs are dry ice, oven and jeep proof according to Phase One advertisement. Just keep in mind that they are not elephant proof… There will be very little wear on a digital back.

As I said, I have both P45+ (in V-mount) and A7rII. I am pretty sure the Hasselblad/P45+ combo will see little use, as I cannot come up with any use where the Hasselblad/P45 would be beneficial. But I enjoy shooting with the Hassy kit, too. Also, the Hasselblad lenses work fine with A7rII, allowing generous tilt and swing on the Sony A7rII with my HCam Master TSII. So the Hassy is a keeper and so is the P45+.

So, what I see right now is that buying low end CCD based MFD right now makes little sense, unless you have a great MFD equipment that you want to enable for digital. In that case a P45+ (or something like it) makes a lot of sense, at the prices we seem to have right now.

Just to say, high en MFD makes a lot of sense if we strive for maximum image quality. But than we talk about 40000€ not 4000€.

Best regards
Erik

On price:

http://www.teamworkphoto.com/used-phase-contax-fitting-digital-back-p-20137.html

P30+ Contax fit £3118 (including VAT UK sales Tax)

https://www.calphoto.co.uk/product/Sony-Alpha-A7R-II-Compact-Mirrorless-Digital-Camera-Body/993-790A

A7rII body only Calumet (still viable in the UK) £2599 (VAT included)

[Christoph B.]

I often ponder how many "casual" shooters get anything like the full potential out of the A7RII for example.
The other plus point I forgot was that by sticking with your Contax you do retain a film option by only carrying a film back in addition not another system.
BTW your point, OP, about the P45+ being "simply too old, both because of its lower resolution and technology," is precisely what the dealers, bless them all, would wish you to believe.

Well the A7RII is definitely easier to handle - no mirror slap, live view, focus isn't that critical and the camera setup is much lighter.

We should not forget the fact that the big sensor of a MFDB also has a big influence on the image quality - that's why I would not recommend getting a smaller MFDB sensor like the P30+. Although you can still get nice files from it, the smaller sensor just makes it less interesting as a MF chip - at last to me.

[kipdent]

To the OP:
Even if you never wanted to buy a Leica lens, and provided that you could live with your widest Contax lens being the equivalent of a moderate wide angle, then I'd strongly suggest you consider this route.  Or, you could just eventually buy the Leica 30-90 zoom, the Leica 30mm, or the Leica 24mm.

William--

Thank you very much for these insights. I enjoy mostly architectural and landscape photography, and overall find myself shooting wide more often than not. As a result, though I love Leica and have handled the Leica S, but I must admit that with an even smaller field of view with my Contax Distagon 35mm lens on the Leica S, I think I would be disappointed. The P45+ sensor size is a bit larger (49.1mm x 36.8mm versus 45.0mm x 30.0mm for the Leica S), so I'm guessing the wide angle appearance would be better with the P45+ on the Contax 645 without having to buy any additional lenses.

Again, all the responses so far have been very helpful, so thanks very much to this community--

[lowep]

Very interesting to read this thread about whether to jump to a legacy digital back with your Contax system as I am exploring going in the opposite direction after many years working with a Contax 645 and Sinarback eMotion 75 (not Emotion 75H) that is still working as good as it did when I first got it but does not get used as much since I started playing around with a Sony A7II and a different style of photography.

I reckon the answer to your question depends a lot on what kind of photography you want to do?

If you mostly work off a tripod either with lights or a decent amount of daylight and want superb IQ then I would say the old eMotion 75 is hard to beat and the Contax 645 system with its superb lenses and basic but nonetheless useable modern touches like AF etc. is easier to use and gives more help to a working photographer than most other cameras that work with this old digital back. Heck it can even be used hand held if you quit smoking, practice yoga and don´t drink too much coffee.

So I would consider keeping your Contax 645 IF you want to use a legacy digital back; rather than consider buying a legacy digital back if you want to keep using your Contax 645, though others may see this differently.

But if you want to point and shoot then you are probably better off with a little Sony mirrorless camera like the A7II that works best, at least in my limited experience, with native FE lenses like the Batis rather than old MF lenses.

Unlike many others I find it difficult to tackle more than one system at a time, which is why my Contax eMotion system is not getting as much use as it used to get since the arrival of the Sony A7II, though maybe I will eventually get tired of pointing and shooting with the Sony A7II like this and go back to doing more precise work with the digital MF system like this, who knows?

n.b. exact model name corrected after error was pointed out by Theodorus below
   

[Theodoros]

I have to post this as people might get confused by the above post... There is no Sinar E-motion 75H back... There are Sinarback E-motion 75, Sinarback E-motion 75LV & Sinarback 75H.... All the above backs share the same sensor, (the Dalsa 33mp 36x48mm chip) which is also used on Leaf's 75/75S/7 &7II backs... The Sinarback 75H is a tethered only back that is able to do multishot 4x and is currently in production, there is no adapter plate for it in production for Contax 645 cameras, but one may use the Contax adapter of the Sinarback 22M which is fully compatible. The Sinarback 75H has an ISO range of 50-400ISO and the quality of images (in single shot mode) is among the best one can get... It is also usable on all its ISO settings with some moderate noise only visible at 400 ISO... The Sinarback E-motion 75LV is a replacement of the first E-motion 75 adding a 2.5" screen and LV to it... One could upgrade the old back to LV but only as far as the LV function retaining the 2.2 screen for it.

The original sensitivity of the E-motion was set to 50-400 Iso range, but this was leading to overexposure so Sinar offered a (free) firmware update where the Sensitivity was changed to 100-800 Iso range... Again, the back is usable on all its ISO settings with only some moderate noise present at the 800 Iso setting... Practically, one can use the back up to what would be right for a DSLR to be used on 1600 ISO by underexposing the back and correct things up when post processing. All in all, the E-motion 75 is among the very best backs ever made for ISO performance... It's color performance (for neutrality) is also second to none and its DR performance is very hard to beat... The back is also "a dream to use" on a view camera because of its "shallow depth" pixels and absence of microlences, as well as its "huge" 7.2μm pixel size. For a reason that is hard to be explained technically, the back is also less prone to artifacts presence (moire) than Kodak's 6.8μm pixel size 39mp sensor backs....

Other than the above, the back doesn't have any fans to extract heat (it uses a very effective Peltier cooling system), nor there are any "holes" on its casing that would allow dust or moisture to access the back's electronics, in addition, the battery chamber is  inside the casing and thus, there is no battery extending out when the back is in use. Even more, it fits the Contax 645 (physically) like ...a dream as its sides coincide with the Contax outer lines perfectly both in height as well as on the left side of the camera... There is only a few mm extension of the adapter plate behind the grip, which doesn't affect at all gripping the camera, nor a bit its ergonomics, neither its aesthetics.... All in all, if one doesn't need multishot (as I do) as to choose the CF-39MS instead and doesn't mind the poor screen (a common with all older backs), the Sinarback Emotion 75LV is among the best backs ever made among all self contained backs and offers more resolution than one will ever need for any size print....

P.S. The Sinarback 75LV was offered as standard with most HY-6 cameras sold around the world and is partly the reason (the other being the Schneider lenses of course) why HY-6 users "rave" for the IQ of their cameras... Contax-Zeiss lenses are not second to the Schneider lenses of the HY-6...

[Theodoros]

I've used Valeo, Aptus 22, P30, p30+, p21+ on the Contax and love the camera, though in the digital world it comes with some issues.

At the time I believe the Aptus produced the prettiest file, though mine being an early version had it's quirks.

I believe Leaf worked most of them out, before being absorbed by Phase One.

Hmmm... If I'm not mistaken, Leaf backs where developed in parallel to Sinarbacks by Jenoptik before P1 invested on Leaf and took control of it... I believe Aptus 22 is a "parallel" back to Emotion 22, Aptus 54  parallel back to E-motion 54LV and then, the same as with Aptus 75S and Emotion 75LV..., even the common use of the Rollei HY-6 cameras suggests the relation... Yet, E-motion backs seem to have a better casing and color calibration method (with Sinar being involved into multishot and the color accuracy needed in art reproduction) and Leaf having a better screen which would suit other kinds of photography where color accuracy is less crucial... As I've said before, I'm not very familiar with Leaf backs, (other than having "tested" the DF & Aptus 12II back combination of a (now) passed out friend)... but it wouldn't surprise me if Aptus 75 shares a similar to Sinarback E-motion's 75 almost perfect behavior on Contax 645 camera... That said, the Sinarback Emotion 75LV I 've tried, was a significant improvement on my first MFDB (the E-motion 22) with even better color neutrality, significantly better in ISO performance, visibly more DR extension (comparable with any modern best out there) and (of course) much more resistant to moire issues.... In fact, I haven't tried the Sinarback 75LV on Contax either, (it was on an HY-6 that I have as I mention before), the compatibility with Contax 645 body that I mention, is all experience out of the years I used the E-motion -22 on Contax, since the two Sinarbacks E-motion's (as well as the 54LV) share exactly the same casing...

[JV]

William--

Thank you very much for these insights. I enjoy mostly architectural and landscape photography, and overall find myself shooting wide more often than not. As a result, though I love Leica and have handled the Leica S, but I must admit that with an even smaller field of view with my Contax Distagon 35mm lens on the Leica S, I think I would be disappointed. The P45+ sensor size is a bit larger (49.1mm x 36.8mm versus 45.0mm x 30.0mm for the Leica S), so I'm guessing the wide angle appearance would be better with the P45+ on the Contax 645 without having to buy any additional lenses.

Again, all the responses so far have been very helpful, so thanks very much to this community--

Understood.  Take into account though that Contax glass on the Leica is not a dead end whereas Phase One backs for the Contax are. 

The newer Phase One IQ3 backs do no longer support the Contax 645. 

That being said, Phase One backs P+ are virtually indestructible and will probably continue to be serviced for another 5 or 10 years. 

[Peter Devos]

Quote from: bcooter on Today at 08:46:36 AM

I've used Valeo, Aptus 22, P30, p30+, p21+ on the Contax and love the camera, though in the digital world it comes with some issues.

At the time I believe the Aptus produced the prettiest file, though mine being an early version had it's quirks.

I believe Leaf worked most of them out, before being absorbed by Phase One.


Hmmm... If I'm not mistaken, Leaf backs where developed in parallel to Sinarbacks by Jenoptik before P1 invested on Leaf and took control of it... I believe Aptus 22 is a "parallel" back to Emotion 22, Aptus 54  parallel back to E-motion 54LV and then, the same as with Aptus 75S and Emotion 75LV..., even the common use of the Rollei HY-6 cameras suggests the relation... Yet, E-motion backs seem to have a better casing and color calibration method (with Sinar being involved into multishot and the color accuracy needed in art reproduction) and Leaf having a better screen which would suit other kinds of photography where color accuracy is less crucial... As I've said before, I'm not very familiar with Leaf backs, (other than having "tested" the DF & Aptus 12II back combination of a (now) passed out friend)... but it wouldn't surprise me if Aptus 75 shares a similar to Sinarback E-motion's 75 almost perfect behavior on Contax 645 camera... That said, the Sinarback Emotion 75LV I 've tried, was a significant improvement on my first MFDB (the E-motion 22) with even better color neutrality, significantly better in ISO performance, visibly more DR extension (comparable with any modern best out there) and (of course) much more resistant to moire issues.... In fact, I haven't tried the Sinarback 75LV on Contax either, (it was on an HY-6 that I have as I mention before), the compatibility with Contax 645 body that I mention, is all experience out of the years I used the E-motion -22 on Contax, since the two Sinarbacks E-motion's (as well as the 54LV) share exactly the same casing...


I thought that the Sinar backs, the early ones were simply made by Jenoptic. Later on, Jenoptic simply disappeared out of the digital back making business. Leaf backs have always been developed and made in Israel ( and maybe some development by Creo in Canada).